COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
CITATION: R. v. Gibson, 2026 ONCA 580
DATE: 20260811
DOCKET: COA-24-CR-0580
Roberts, Thorburn and Rahman JJ.A.
BETWEEN
His Majesty the King
Respondent
and
Connor Gibson
Appellant
Stephen Whitzman and Jonathan Vo, for the appellant
Jeremy D. Tatum, for the respondent
Heard: November 28, 2025
On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Harrison S. Arrell of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, on December 15, 2023, and the sentence imposed on June 20, 2024.
ADDENDUM
[1] On June 26, 2026, we released our decision dismissing the appeal from conviction and allowing the appeal from sentence. We determined that a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by a three-year probation order, was a fit sentence in the circumstances of this case.
[2] Further to our request, the parties have provided written submissions respecting the provisions of the conditional sentence and probation orders, and a draft conditional sentence order.
[3] Starting with the conditional sentence order, we agree with the Crown’s position that the house arrest provision should continue throughout the entire term of the conditional sentence order, subject to the provision allowing the appellant, the Crown or the appellant’s supervisor to apply to the court to vary it. We accept the further exception suggested by the appellant in para. 8 of the draft order that he be excepted “for going directly to and from or being at the Goodlife Fitness Centre at 185 The West Mall in Etobicoke for a period of two hours, once weekly”, as this is a pro-social provision that will benefit the appellant’s rehabilitation. The parties have agreed on all the other terms, as set out in the draft order.
[4] With respect to the probation order, in addition to the compulsory conditions under s. 732.1(2) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, the following optional conditions in ss. 732(3)(a), (a.1), (d) and (h) should be imposed: reporting; no direct or indirect communication with Alex Francis, Zachary Wilkinson, or any member of the immediate family of Wiliam Nicholas Smith; weapons prohibition; and counselling as directed by the appellant’s parole officer. We do not see the need for s. 732.1(3)(b) – remaining within the jurisdiction.
[5] Orders to go in accordance with this addendum.
“L.B. Roberts J.A.”
“Thorburn J.A.”
“M. Rahman J.A.”